SOROKHAIBAM BIKRAMADITYA SINGH Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The doctor (the appellant herein) has been convicted for offences like abducting of a fellow doctor and subjecting her to sexual assault, etc. Hence, the appellant is hereby assailing the judgment and order dated 20.9.1993 passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, No. 1, Manipur East in Sessions Trial Case No. 9 of 1989. By this judgment, the learned trial Judge has convicted the appellant under section 376 read with section 511, 366 read with section 34 and section 327 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC'). The appellant has been sentenced to undergo RI for one year for the offence of attempted rape 8 years S.I. with fine of Rs. 5,000 has been awarded for the offence of abduction and 2 years S.I. has been awarded for the offence under section 327, Penal Code. Being aggrieved with his conviction and sentence, the accused has preferred this appeal.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of Shri N. Kerani, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. C. Samudragupta Singh for the appellant. I have also heard the arguments of Mr. R.S. Reisang, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor representing the State. I have also gone through the impugned judgment and oral and documentary evidence proffered by the prosecution and defence in the trial court.

(3.) The factual matrix in short compass is that in the year 1986, both the appellant and the victim girls were medical students at Regional Medical College, Imphal. The girl student used to attend here classes from home. On the particular day, i.e., on 22.9.1986, at about 7.40 in the morning, the victim woman "SD" (full name withheld by me) was going to her college as usual on a motor bike (Luna). She was way laid by the appellant accompanied by a few other boys. The accused persons came in a jeep and forcibly lifted the victim girl in the said vehicle and took her to a nearby locality. It is also the prosecution case that the victim girl was forced to marry the appellant. It is also the case of the prosecution that the victim girl was taken to a house having inmates and in the said house, the appellant attempted to sexually molest her. However, the victim girl resisted her molestation and as such, the appellant did not succeed in the said attempt.